Nadie_AZ:The Pew Research Center has found that some 90 percent of Americans believe that the government should do everything it can to ensure equality of opportunity.

I read this, and I am not sure I can believe it. If it were true, then the GOP would be a far more progressive party than it is. Same with the Dems.

50% of people have an IQ below 100. People vote against their own best interests. People vote for religion and hate. People vote for bigotry.FFS W was elected twice. He was the least intelligent president ever.

But ensuring equality of opportunity does not mean the same thing to everyone. Dems think of that as providing aid to people at the bottom. GOPs think of that as cutting taxes so government is out of their way (which would otherwise prevent opportunity)

The fact that you dont "believe" a poll is proof that most people dont even understand how polls work.

The US has the third lowest upward mobility index behind Italy and Great Britain

Ignore the dream of being break out rich or even two cars in the garage and a chicken in every pot. The real American dream has always been if you play it straight your children will have more opportunity then you had. With 20 somethings and younger today we are seeing the dream evaporate. The cost of education has shot up, the job market has crashed. We (Gen Y) were told go to college, get good grades, and you will be alright. Instead you have JDs waiting tables and people with solid degrees doing jobs they could have done out of high school. Don't give me the crap about oh if you went into STEM, thanks to outsourcing, H1As, loss of grants, etc... those fields aren't that much more secure these days.

We are looking at a lost decade and a lost generation unless we decide that we need to do something about it instead of attempting austerity. The life time earnings of Gen Y are going to be significantly less just because of how late we are getting into actual jobs.

slayer199:zedster: right, let's forget the robber barons and gilded age

And forget that people had more upward mobility back then as opposed to now.

Maybe, but you are skipping some data points here, let's skip the 1800s and move to post-WWII. The middle class grew during the 1950s and continued into the 70s, then it started to crash down a bit. Why?

zedster:I keep harping it but I feel the 1912 Wisconsin Idea, which formed much of the philosophical backing of the New Deal, covers a lot of this.

Why not take by taxation some of that wealth acquired by Force? Why allow idle sons and daughters to waste this wealth; why not tax them by graduated income, inheritance and increment taxes, so that they bear a burden proportionate to their strength, in order that the burden of maintaining the state shall not fall so heavily on the poor? Will this be permitted? Will not that same dreaded Force terrorize our legislators? They are but human, with business interests and families to support.

Why not make public the affairs of monopolies, so that they cannot buy the votes of electors or legislators? Why not limit the power of wealth in elections? It cannot buy the whole people, can it? If not, why not make our legislators directly responsible to us so that we may watch them? Why not simplify the whole machinery of nomination and election so that we are certain to elect the men we want--men of honesty and strength?

this would solve 98% of the problems in the US (and the world).this would also impact 2% of the population and only to a minor degree.(owning 10% (or 20% or even 50%) less houses and planes and cars and islands is a minor inconvenience for the 2%, not the end of the world as we know it. Poor little rich kids.

And forget that people had more upward mobility back then as opposed to now.

Maybe, but you are skipping some data points here, let's skip the 1800s and move to post-WWII. The middle class grew during the 1950s and continued into the 70s, then it started to crash down a bit. Why?

[cdn.theatlantic.com image 615x447]Source

this is all about the reagan royalty revolution. Until we undo that, we will continue to wallow.bring back the death taxes. bring back cap gain taxes. bring back (implement) wealth taxes. reinstate glass-steagall.

And forget that people had more upward mobility back then as opposed to now.

Maybe, but you are skipping some data points here, let's skip the 1800s and move to post-WWII. The middle class grew during the 1950s and continued into the 70s, then it started to crash down a bit. Why?

[cdn.theatlantic.com image 615x447]Source

Outsourcing labor to countries where you can pay someone the American equvlant of 2$ a day? Automation?

And forget that people had more upward mobility back then as opposed to now.

Maybe, but you are skipping some data points here, let's skip the 1800s and move to post-WWII. The middle class grew during the 1950s and continued into the 70s, then it started to crash down a bit. Why?

[cdn.theatlantic.com image 615x447]Source

this is all about the reagan royalty revolution. Until we undo that, we will continue to wallow.bring back the death taxes. bring back cap gain taxes. bring back (implement) wealth taxes. reinstate glass-steagall.

these efforts would have little to zero impact on 99%

oh wait, the 1% decide what will happen.nevermind

How will taking from them build you up?Why bring someone else down to make you feel more equal?

And forget that people had more upward mobility back then as opposed to now.

Maybe, but you are skipping some data points here, let's skip the 1800s and move to post-WWII. The middle class grew during the 1950s and continued into the 70s, then it started to crash down a bit. Why?

And forget that people had more upward mobility back then as opposed to now.

Citation Needed.

The opportunities were plentiful to all those 10 years working in coal mines. They could grow up to be a destitute 25 year old dying of black lung or a destitute 32 year old dying of black lung. The possibilities were limitless.

Higher education isn't the problem. The problem is that our culture seems to value education of any kind less and less with each generation. That problem isn't so easy to fix with public funding, so we ignore it.

GoldSpider:Higher education isn't the problem. The problem is that our culture seems to value education of any kind less and less with each generation. That problem isn't so easy to fix with public funding, so we ignore it.

Yeah pretty much this.

Although I do think that bumping up Pell grants a little wouldn't hurt.

<i>It's not that social mobility is impossible, but that the upwardly mobile American is becoming a statistical oddity. According to research from the Brookings Institution, only <b>58 percent</b> of Americans born into the bottom fifth of income earners move out of that category, </i>

When only the majority can get out of abject poverty in one generation, the dream is truly dead.

And forget that people had more upward mobility back then as opposed to now.

Maybe, but you are skipping some data points here, let's skip the 1800s and move to post-WWII. The middle class grew during the 1950s and continued into the 70s, then it started to crash down a bit. Why?

[cdn.theatlantic.com image 615x447]Source

this is all about the reagan royalty revolution. Until we undo that, we will continue to wallow.bring back the death taxes. bring back cap gain taxes. bring back (implement) wealth taxes. reinstate glass-steagall.

these efforts would have little to zero impact on 99%

oh wait, the 1% decide what will happen.nevermind

How will taking from them build you up?Why bring someone else down to make you feel more equal?